why fear anything? what's to be afraid of?

you shouldn't fear but its still a natural response to chemicals being released in your brain

Why should there be rain eh ?

The difference between a smart and dumb person is similar to two hitch hikers who flagged down different cars, after arrival, one hiker proudly showing off to the other that he arrived so much quicker while this hiker was fortunate to be hosted by a driver with a new and fast car,
And the other hiker was riding an old slow vehicle.

Likewise, the difference between the degree of intelligence is an external circumstance, the most honest programming (minds) will turn all the people it finds into intelligent people, and the dysfunctional and false programming will render all its consumers, foolish.......

Fear is not an item residing in the external environment that you somehow become engaged with, because you decided it will benefit you to experience it.

Fear occurs when your ego identifies itself as a frightened ego instead of a secure ego,
Which means that you and the fear are now one in essence.

When you find some general idea beneficial and decide to adopt it.
What actually occurred is, that this beneficial selection actually adopted you without your slightest say in the matter.

The reason it even seemed beneficial in the first place is, because the programming (mind) that found you as an infant, judges this as beneficial,

You, can't even become involved to determine this very judgement.

If your gps takes you on a certain route, suddenly it tells you about an accident that just occurred, and it chooses an alternative route in response.

It would be obvious, that the accident choose (determined) the route change for the GPS.

The GPS is merely attempting to reach the destination.
Whatever option (route) presents itself with the most promise, as leading to this destination with the most efficiency,
Determines that the quest for destiny will commit to this route (selection) through enforcement by its preprogrammed nature.

Humans are no different.

We are preset to pursue thriving survival.
All the routes (options) claim to be leading you there, otherwise they wouldn't even be a consideration.

The emotional intensity behind each option,
Mostly Determines the winner.

The one with the most conviction, invalidates the claim in the remaining options ,regarding the destination they are supposedly leading​ to.

So they are no longer optional and therefore are eliminated.

Now the instinct, instinctively follows the only remaining option (route) leading to survival.

Without the process of elimination, it is impossible for the physical body to intervene in mind affairs.

When one finds fear the only option remaining,
It's because fear presented itself as the only route that leads to survival.

Fear even invalidated the ideas you learned in this blog regarding the dysfunction in fear and the harm it causes.

Otherwise, it couldn't have inspired your instinct to engage in it.

The factors which determine the appeal intensity within the claim are varying and complex, and consist mainly of emotional flavor and active consciousness (which is the expression of passive existence).

When the inspiration to conclude that fear is dysfunctional is generated,

It doesn't take into account the competing inspiration which claims that without concern, you will die.

I deliberately state inspiration,
Because without it, merely memorizing the pale theory that fear protects you from annihilation,
Wouldn't match up to the energy in the present moment inspiration, the competing theory presents.

Thought about Words and Logic are invisible without some emotion present to give it flavor and mass.

What seems most logical isn't because it contains the most logic,
But because the logic it contains, carries the most emotional impact.

While logic fuels emotional intensity.

Many other factors are much better contributors.

Possibly, the foundation or source (early life development) of your logic, brushing aside its evolved present logic (when the two contradict),
Is a great example of competing factors overpowering the present moment evolution of your logic.

And the reason early life logic is so much more convincing is, because the earlier you go, the less competition is around, so the conviction in the perceived idea, accumulates emotional energy and intensity without much limitation and restriction.

You didn't need to trust your mother when she told you about God or the devil and anything in between.

The need for trust didn't exist yet.

Compare your need for trust (in mine or your capacity to process logic soundly) as you read my article, to the need to trust, as your basic linguistic abilities were developing.

When you read this, all the conflicting suggestions in you, strip off excitement from each other, so even when one emerges victorious, not much flavor is left.

Ideas and programming, perceived in early life not only take root deeper due to its position on the calendar,
But also because perception itself was then performing, at the highest standards and quality, so the content it perceived then, are internalized accordingly and are deeply entrenched in result.


Another factor is, how much time you have been investing in thinking unrelated info, since the inspiration has occurred.

Fresh and uninterrupted data, will always have an advantage over older inspiration stored in your memory (in terms of this particular factor, meaning that if everything else is otherwise equal, this will be the determination).

So as you read about the dysfunction of fear,
This inspiration is King , meaning, should a recommendation of fear arise (very unlikely it should even be noticed), it will most likely fail to consume you.

As you move on in life and something frightening is noticed (a suggestion of fear,
suggested by potential threat and recommended by some programmed opinions on such a scenario), the inspiration to freak out is momentarily newer than the inspiration in the ideas regarding remaining calm, chances are, that factory fresh will be victorious.

Imagery is Another factor.

A image speaks more than a thousand words.

So when the suggestion to freak is presented through an image,
How do you expect, that lines of symbols in a document you red, should have a decent chance against the visual threat and indulgence?

The imagery within thought, might also be a factor.
Did you manifest the conclusion about relinquishing fear through imagining a scene of calm in the face of threat and aggression?

Chances are this might determine its effect.

It's not that you were convinced of a certain view and acted upon it.

Once, coincidences shaped a perspective within the idea, for you to perceive and fall for , without the slightest control over the perspective or the perceiving process (you are the perception only, the perceiving and the perspective are as much in your control as the illumination intensity of the sun),

The commitment simply occurs without your involvement,
without you or anyone doing it or partaking (your survival instinct never chose itself, it was destined to naturally follow survival before you were capable of processing a single word or thought,
It actually determined that there will be language and thought).